GIFT  OF 


-<^*j^->^ 


The  New 

Bible-Country 


By 

Thomas  Franklin  Day 

Professor  of  Old  Testament  Languages  and  Literature 
in  the  San  Francisco  Theological  Seminary 


JSew  York 
Thomas  Y.  Crowell  &  Co. 

Publishers 


COPYRIGHT,  1910 
BY  THOMAS  Y.  CROWELL  &  Co. 


cy" 


TO 

THE   MEMORY  OF  MY 

FATHER  AND  MOTHER 

DWELLERS   IN   THE   OLD   BIBLE-COUNTRY 

WHOSE   CHRISTIAN   FAITH   I   SHARE 

WHILE   LIVING   IN   THE  NEW 


FOREWORD 

SOME  there  are  who  still  look  askance  at  the 
modern   view   of  the  Bible,   fearing   lest   it 
should  result  in  the  shipwreck  of  faith. 

Others,  less  fearful,  are  too  busy  to  read  exten- 
sively in  a  field  that  has  grown  so  large  as  to  be 
embarrassing  to  the  non-technical  reader. 

It  is  hoped  that  both  classes  will  find  help 
from  the  following  pages. 

T.  F.  D. 

SAN  ANSELMO,  CALIFORNIA, 
AUGUST  24,  1909. 


The  New  Bible-Country1 


Thine  eyes  .  .  .  shall  behold  a  land  that  reacheth  afar. — 
(A.  R.  V.)  ISAIAH  xxxiii.  17. 

MY  reason  for  choosing  this  theme  will  appear 
as  I  proceed.  The  topic  for  this  evening 
in  the  program  for  the  Week  of  Prayer  calls  for  a 
consideration  of  the  present  situation  respecting 
the  Bible. 

We  are  reminded  that  the  Bible  has  undergone 
a  "searching  inquiry";  that  it  has  passed  safely 
through  "the  flame  of  criticism."  Whether  the 
escape  from  destruction  was  due  to  the  efforts 
made  to  put  out  the  fire,  or  whether  it  was  because 
of  the  indestructibility  of  the  Bible,  we  are  not 
informed.  We  naturally  infer  that  the  latter  is 
the  real  reason. 

I  recall  certain  books  published  some  years 
ago  which  seemed  to  have  been  written  in  the  glare 
of  the  conflagration;  books  hastily  put  forth  by 
busy  pastors  for  the  purpose  of  quieting  the  fears 
of  laymen  who  saw  the  red  glow  in  the  sky,  and 

1  An  address  delivered  in  the  First  Presbyterian  Church, 
San  Rafael,  California,  January  4,  1909. 

[7] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

who  had  confused  notions  as  to  the  extent  of  the 
fire  and  the  seriousness  of  its  ravages. 

When  a  fire  has  occurred,  an  official  report 
from  the  Fire  Department  is  more  informing  and 
goes  farther  to  confirm  or  remove  our  fears  than 
the  first  impressions  of  spectators  or  the  story 
told  by  the  "Extra"  which  is  hawked  about  the 
streets  while  the  fire  is  in  progress.  But  the 
report  of  the  Fire  Department,  or  for  that  matter 
any  sane  and  full  report  of  the  affair,  is  not  made 
till  after  the  fire  has  spent  its  fury  and  the  net 
loss  has  been  ascertained. 

The  signs  all  point  to  the  present  as  a  time 
when  it  is  safe  to  venture  into  the  burnt  district 
and  inquire  how  the  Bible  has  endured  the  fire 
test,  whether  there  has  been  any  loss,  and  to  what 
extent.  But  lo,  we  have  scarcely  arrived  on  the 
scene  when  the  sights  and  sounds  of  reconstruc- 
tion meet  us  everywhere.  Ignis  fuit,  the  fire  is  a 
thing  of  the  past,  and  the  present  is  full  of  plans 
for  rebuilding  on  more  solid  foundations  and  on 
a  larger  scale  than  before. 

It  is  time  to  explain  these  figures  of  speech 
before  we  discard  them.  There  has  been  a  fire? 
Yes.  And  the  Bible  went  through  it?  Yes. 
And  suffered  loss  ?  Ah !  that 's  the  point !  Has 
the  Bible  taken  hurt  ?  It  will  be  found,  I  think, 
that  the  Bible  itself  has  not  been  injured,  but,  on 
[8] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

the  contrary,  that  it  has  been  burnished  into 
rarer  beauty  by  the  flame  that  refined,  but  could 
not  destroy,  its  gold.  Yet  something  was  de- 
stroyed ?  Yes,  of  a  truth,  for  the  fire  was  fearsome 
while  it  lasted.  Certain  theories  about  the  Bible, 
decisions  of  earlier  critics,  higher  and  lower,  who 
had  vast  influence  among  the  Jews  and  early 
Christians,  were  brought  to  book  by  later  critics, 
lower  and  higher,  whose  influence  in  the  world  to- 
day is  great;  and  it  was  these  theories  and  deci- 
sions, with  their  corollaries  and  dependencies, 
which  the  consuming  fire  converted  into  smoke 
and  ashes. 

The  only  reason  why  the  Bible  is  ever  made  to 
pass  through  the  fire  is  because  the  theories  re- 
garding the  Bible  get  so  closely  entwined  about 
the  book  itself  and  borrow  so  lavishly  of  the  sacred- 
ness  that  belongs  to  the  Bible  alone  that  only 
fire  can  separate  the  one  from  the  other.  The 
Bible  is  fire-proof,  but  our  theories  respecting  it, 
even  the  books  we  write  in  defense  of  it,  may  not 
endure  the  fiery  trial,  for  men's  views  concerning 
the  Bible  must  suffer  revision  with  every  passing 
age.  Fire  is  a  cleanser,  and  many  who  watched 
the  late  conflagration  which  raged  round  the 
Bible  say  the  net  result  is  a  better  building  spot 
for  the  reconstruction  of  Bible  theory.  And  the 
reconstruction  is  now  in  progress;  the  "burnt 
[9] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

district"  is  alive  with  workmen  and  resonant  with 
the  music  of  their  tools.  A  working  theory  olthe 
Bible  has  taken  the  place  of  that  which  the  fire 
destroyed ;  and  on  the  broad  lines  of  its  construc- 
tive plan  structure  after  structure  is  rising,  in  the 
departments  of  historical  research,  formulation 
of  doctrine,  and  practical  application  of  Bible 
truth. 

I  am  aware  that  to  some  of  you  this  may  sound 
quite  cavalier.  It  looks  as  if  some  folks,  having 
taken  it  into  their  heads  to  have  a  bonfire,  had 
gone  about  gathering  materials  which  were  of  no 
value  to  them,  and  tossed  them  into  the  blaze 
without  asking  leave  of  the  owners.  I  wish  to  re- 
move this  impression.  It  cannot  be  done  by 
saying  there  has  been  no  fire.  But  suppose  we 
ask  where  the  fire  occurred.  The  answer  must 
be:  Not  in  any  public  place.  No  literal  burning 
of  books  was  essayed;  that  method  of  suppress- 
ing error  has  never  been  satisfactory.  The  fire 
was  real,  not  imaginary;  but  it  was  mental,  not 
material ;  it  occurred,  and  still  occurs,  only  within 
the  mind  and  with  the  mind's  full  consent. 

Our  figure  of  speech,  in  short,  means  nothing 
more  nor  less  than  this:  that  as  a  result  of  the 
discussion  which  has  been  active  in  Great  Britain 
and  America  for  the  last  third  of  a  century  con- 
cerning the  Bible  —  its  origin  and  nature  —  many 
[10] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

Christian  scholars  have  found  it  impossible  to 
accept  certain  conclusions  which  time  had  made 
venerable,  because  in  their  judgment  these  con- 
clusions are  not  in  harmony  with  facts  which  a 
discriminating  and  impartial  inquiry  has  brought 
to  light;  an  inquiry  pursued  under  more  favor- 
able conditions  and  with  better  instruments  of 
research  than  were  possible  in  any  previous  age. 
This  discarding  of  time-honored  theories  has 
been  their  own  act,  and  in  the  first  instance  for 
themselves  alone.  They  have,  so  to  speak,  kin- 
dled in  their  own  minds  the  fire  to  whose  flames 
they  consigned  these  theories.  Christian  candor 
compelled  them  so  to  do;  they  kept  their  con- 
sciences void  of  offense  in  presence  of  what  they 
believed  to  be  truth.  Sometimes  it  has  cost  them 
dear  to  break  thus  with  their  own  intellectual 
past.  Some  have  experienced  the  anguish  of  sus- 
pense and  uncertainty  which  follows  the  surren- 
der of  cherished  convictions  before  the  new  light 
has  fully  dawned.  Others  hare  felt  the  expulsive 
power  of  the  new  truth  and  have  had  clear  visions 
from  the  first.  But  when  they  proclaimed  the 
new  doctrine  they  were  called  visionaries;  their 
views  were  either  thought  "impossible"  or  con- 
demned as  destructive  of  Christian  faith.  The 
story  in  full  need  not  be  repeated  here ;  it  belongs 
to  the  history  of  the  progress  of  thought.  Such 
[11] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

struggles  resemble  the  growing  pains  of  child- 
hood and  youth;  they  are  incident  to  all  intellec- 
tual and  spiritual  advancement. 

I  spoke  of  discarding  the  figure  of  speech  with 
which  we  began.  Let  us  substitute  for  it  one 
which  has  pleasanter  associations;  one  that  con- 
tains less  fire  and  more  land  and  water.  Let  us 
think  of  the  new  view  of  the  Bible  as  a  new  coun- 
try which  men  have  subdued  and  made  habitable, 
and  in  which  they  may  dwell  in  peace.  This 
implies  that  there  is  still  an  old  country  in  which 
those  who  wish  to  do  so  may  continue  to  reside, 
seeing  it  is  the  land  of  their  fathers,  the  land  of 
their  nativity,  dear  to  affection  and  memory. 

I  shall  speak  then  of  the  old  interpretation  of 
the  Bible,  which  is  sanctioned  by  tradition  and 
hallowed  by  ancestral  faith,  as  "the  old  world," 
"the  old  country";  and  the  revised  interpreta- 
tion, which  claims  to  be  in  harmony  with  the 
spirit  and  method  of  Christ,  and  to  be  in  direct 
line  of  descent  from  the  best  interpreters  of  the 
Christian  centuries,  I  shall  call  "the  new  world," 
"the  new  country."  If  I  depart  from  the  figure 
at  any  time  and  speak  in  literal  terms,  it  will  be 
for  our  mutual  convenience;  the  truth  of  the 
figure  will  abide. 

It  is  evident  at  the  outset  that  when  we  speak  of 
the  "old  world"  and  the  "new  world,"  we  do  not 
[12] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

mean  lands  situated  on  different  planets.  The 
old  Bible-country  and  the  new  Bible-country  — 
widely  separated  as  they  are  — -  are  parts  of  one 
and  the  same  Bible-globe.  The  Bible  in  each  is 
practically  the  same;  each  contains  sixty-six 
books;  each  has  an  Old  Testament  and  a  New 
Testament.  Just  as  the  soil  of  Europe  is  in  gen- 
eral the  same  as  that  of  America,  so  that  flora  can 
be  transplanted  from  one  to  the  other,  even  so 
the  soil  of  the  new  Bible-country  is  as  favorable 
to  the  growth  of  spiritual  character  as  is  that  of 
the  old  Bible-country.  And  yet,  just  as  the  old 
world  and  the  new  world,  between  which  the 
Atlantic  rolls,  differ  from  each  other  in  many 
important  respects,  so  do  these  two  Bible-countries 
exhibit  marked  differences  which  the  traveller 
cannot  fail  to  observe.  We  may  note  some  of 
these  differences.  If  anything  that  is  here  said  sur- 
prises you,  remember  that  it  belongs  to  the  story 
of  a  new  world.  We  must  expect  new  countries 
to  produce  marvels  of  some  sort.  The  new  Bible- 
country  is  no  exception. 

I  find  myself  greatly  embarrassed  at  just  this 
point,  because  the  field  is  wide  and  the  time  is 
short.  I  must  ask  you  to  take  a  swift  overland 
journey,  with  brief  stops  at  the  most  important 
points  only.  Details  must  for  the  most  part  be 
omitted.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  books,  large  and 
[13] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

small,  have  been  written  by  many  scholars  of  the 
new  Bible-country,  that  treat  exhaustively  every 
phase  mentioned  in  this  hurried  survey. 

I  wish  in  a  sentence  or  two  to  describe  the  in- 
struments and  methods  employed  by  biblical 
scholars  of  the  "new  land."  They  believe  in  God 
devoutly,  and  pray  for  the  guidance  of  His  Holy 
Spirit.  They  also  use  all  the  approved  appliances 
known  to  men  for  the  study  of  literary  composi- 
tions. For  example,  they  employ  textual  criti- 
cism, in  order  to  determine  the  exact  words  of 
Scripture.  They  collate  manuscripts  and  ver- 
sions, and  select  the  best  attested  readings.  They 
employ  the  higher  criticism  to  fix  precisely,  if 
possible,  or  at  least  approximately,  the  author- 
ship, date,  and  historical  environment  of  every 
document  of  Scripture.  These  critical  methods 
are  known  and  used  in  the  "old  country"  also, 
the  only  difference  being  this,  perhaps,  that  in  the 
"new  country"  the  Bible  has  been  subjected  to  a 
more  rigid  cross-examination  than  in  any  pre- 
vious period  of  its  history. 

The  scholars  of  that  land  summon  the  Bible 
itself  as  the  chief  witness,  and  base  their  conclu- 
sions mainly  upon  its  testimony.  They  are  un- 
willing to  affirm  anything  about  the  Bible  until 
the  facts  which  the  Bible  presents  have  been  dili- 
gently scanned.  Their  method  is  not  a  priori  but 
[14] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

a  posteriori.  They  do  not  say  beforehand  that 
God  in  giving  a  revelation  will  proceed  thus  and 
so,  and  that  the  book  which  contains  the  revela- 
tion will  be  marked  by  such  and  such  qualities; 
they  first  patiently  interrogate  the  facts,  and  they 
then  declare  how  God  has  actually  revealed  Him- 
self, and  what  characteristics  the  Bible  actually 
exhibits. 

Among  the  most  important  conclusions  at  which 
modern  scholars  have  arrived  are  these : 

1.  The  Bible  is  a  Divine-human  book.     The 
revelation   it  contains  has   its  fountain-head   in 
God.    But  the  channels  through  which  its  various 
streams  have  flowed  are  the  deep  soul-experiences 
of  men  who  had  intimate  fellowship  with  God. 
The  Bible,  therefore,  is  the  record  of  human  ex- 
perience, as  elect  spirits  were  illumined,  instructed, 
and  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God.    It  came  straight 
from  God,  yet  it  came  from  God  by  way  of  man's 
spiritual  insight  and  deep  moral  aspirations.     It 
was  not  dictated.     It  grew.     Every  great  litera- 
ture is  the  outgrowth  of  a  rich  and  varied  national 
experience.     The  Bible  illustrates  this  universal 
law.     The  Bible   touches  human   life  at  every 
point,  because  the  life  of  a  God-illumined  race 
breathes  from  it  through  every  pore. 

2.  Revelation,  as  recorded  in  the  Bible,  is  pro- 
gressive,   because    it    rests    upon    a    progressive 

[15] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

human  experience.  God  deals  with  men,  even 
inspired  men,  as  with  children;  He  teaches  truth 
in  the  measure  in  which  they  are  able  to  receive  it. 
Their  ideas  respecting  the  being  and  character  of 
God  necessarily  changed  from  age  to  age.  Con- 
sequently, the  ethical  and  spiritual  ideals  which 
satisfied  the  men  of  one  age  were  often  supple- 
mented or  even  supplanted  by  ideals  of  a  later 
age.  The  Bible  faithfully  records  the  various 
stages  of  this  spiritual  development. 

3.  The  priority  and  predominance  of  the  pro- 
phetic element  in  Scripture  is  commonly  recognized 
by  the  men  of  the  new  school.  The  Bible  is  a 
preaching  book,  because  its  human  authors  were 
for  the  most  part  preeminently  preachers  and 
teachers.  Prophecy  is  essentially  preaching.  It 
is  preaching  with  authority,  and  comes  there- 
fore with  all  the  force  of  a  divine  law.  The  au- 
thority for  the  preacher's  message  is,  "  Thus  saith 
Jehovah."  The  teaching  and  the  preaching  are 
imperative.  They  constitute  the  highest  form  of 
law.  The  prophetic  "law"  differs  from  the 
ceremonial  law  as  the  end  differs  from  the  means, 
as  principle  from  rule,  or  sometimes,  even  more 
fundamentally,  as  substance  differs  from  form,  as 
spirit  from  letter.  Prophecy  sounds  the  deepest 
note  in  Hebrew  religion  and  ethics.  It  is  the 
original  strain  that  differentiates  the  Hebrews,  in 
[16] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

life  and  thought,  from  the  surrounding  nations. 
It  is  "the  living  wellspring  of  the  divine  self- 
communication."  Prophecy,  therefore,  is  the  life- 
blood  of  the  Old  Testament.  Prophecy  prepares 
the  way  for  Christ,  not  by  uttering  verbal  pre- 
dictions of  His  coming  (for  the  prophets  nowhere 
predict  the  details  of  His  earthly  life) ,  but  by  doing 
its  own  work  in  its  own  day  so  grandly  that  Jesus 
when  He  came  found  a  godly  remnant,  trained  in 
the  school  of  prophecy,  ready  to  receive  Him; 
and  through  the  fulfillment  in  His  own  person  of 
their  spiritual  hopes  and  desires,  He  was  able  to 
establish  on  earth  His  Heavenly  Kingdom. 

Keeping  in  mind  these  general  principles  of 
interpretation,  let  us  note  some  of  the  main  con- 
clusions of  the  modern  school  respecting  the  com- 
position of  the  books  of  the  Bible.  Here  I  will  ask 
you  to  allow  me  to  draw  my  illustrations  chiefly 
from  the  Old  Testament,  partly  because  I  am 
more  familiar  with  it,  and  partly  because  the  Old 
Testament  has  been  the  principal  battle  ground 
of  opinion  during  the  last  half  century. 

1.  It  is  held  in  the  "  new  country"  that  many  of 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  of  composite 
structure.  Various  documents  have  entered  into 
their  formation.  These  documents  have  sometimes 
been  blended  so  as  to  form  a  single  narrative,  or 
they  stand  side  by  side  in  practically  their  original 
[17] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

form  as  separate  compositions.  The  story  of  the 
flood  is  an  illustration  of  the  first  method,  and  the 
two  stories  of  the  creation  in  Genesis,  chapters 
one  and  two,  of  the  second  method. 

2.  It  is  held  that  the  biblical  writers  sometimes 
incorporated  mythical  and  legendary  materials, 
because  these  served  their  purpose  as  preachers  of 
divine  truth.  Sometimes  the  myth  stands  out  in 
high  relief,  as  in  the  fragment  found  in  Genesis 
vi.  1-4,  which  tells  of  the  marriage  of  the  sons  of 
God  with  the  daughters  of  men.  As  an  example 
of  the  legend  (which,  be  it  remembered,  may  often 
rest  on  an  historical  basis) ,  one  may  refer  to  the 
genealogical  tables  in  the  book  of  Genesis. 

The  feeling  which  sometimes  exists  in  the  minds 
of  Bible  readers  that  the  presence  of  myth  and 
legend  would  lessen  the  value  of  the  Bible  has  no 
place  in  the  minds  of  these  men.  They  think  of 
myths  as  the  philosophy  and  science  of  peoples 
still  in  their  childhood,  and  of  legends  as  the 
primitive  man's  history,  in  which  the  creative 
imagination,  working  on  a  nucleus  of  dry  fact, 
paints  imperishable  pictures  and  recites  immortal 
epics  that  charm  the  mind  and  warm  the  heart, 
and  keep  the  springs  of  human  interest  and  sym- 
pathy from  running  dry. 

Among  the  Semites,  as  among  other  ancient 
peoples,  myth  and  legend  had  a  luxuriant  growth. 
[18] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

In  them  the  loftiest  spiritual  truths  were  en- 
shrined. For  inquiring  and  thoughtful  minds 
they  furnished  acceptable  solutions  of  the  deepest 
problems  of  life.  The  Hebrews  came  into  posses- 
sion of  them  partly  by  inheritance,  and  partly 
through  contact  with  other  nations.  A  record  of 
the  ways  of  God  in  teaching  His  chosen  people 
which  should  find  no  place  for  myth  and  legend 
would  be  incomplete,  for  it  would  leave  in  the 
shadow  the  most  interesting  period  of  Israel's 
history,  the  period  of  early  childhood,  when,  as 
Hosea  says,  Jehovah  taught  Ephraim  to  walk, 
taking  him  up  in  His  arms.  If  the  truth  of  God 
in  the  early  time  embodied  itself  in  myth  and 
legend,  the  sanctity  of  the  Bible  is  not  desecrated 
by  the  appearance  of  these  on  its  pages.  It  should 
be  said,  however,  that  the  forms  in  which  they 
appear  in  the  Bible  are  free  from  the  coarse  mate- 
rialistic features  which  characterize  the  myths  of 
other  peoples.  The  Hebrew  religious  spirit,  itself 
a  gift  from  God,  cleansed  the  vessels  into  which 
it  poured  its  new  wine  and  oil. 

3.  The  facts  also  show,  as  the  modern  school 
believes,  that  the  biblical  writers  sometimes 
idealized  the  past.  They  reconstructed  the  his- 
tory in  the  light  of  present  knowledge.  Though 
conforming  in  the  main  to  the  facts,  they  assumed 
the  existence  in  the  remoter  past  of  institutions  and 
[19] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

customs  in  the  same  developed  form  to  which  they 
were  themselves  accustomed.  This  fact  gives  no 
trouble  to  Bible  readers  in  the  new  country.  They 
recognize  it  as  one  of  the  instinctive  tendencies  of 
human  nature;  we  all  idealize  the  home  of  our 
childhood,  the  acquaintances  of  early  youth,  and 
our  dearest  friends;  the  farther  they  recede  from 
us  in  time  and  become  enshrined  in  loving  memory, 
the  more  is  this  the  case.  Moreover,  given  the 
date  of  composition,  and  this  idealizing  process 
furnishes  a  clew  to  the  ideals  which  were  current 
in  the  time  of  the  writer.  Thus  what  at  first  sight 
might  seem  a  blemish  in  the  book  becomes  when 
more  closely  studied  one  of  its  highest  excellences. 
Interesting  examples  of  the  idealizing  process  are 
afforded  by  the  book  of  Deuteronomy,  which  was 
written  from  the  prophetic,  and  by  the  books  of 
Chronicles,  which  were  written  from  the  priestly, 
standpoint;  the  former  idealizes  the  time  of 
Moses,  and  the  latter  the  period  of  the  early 
monarchy. 

4.  Bible  students  in  the  new  country  believe 
also  that  they  have  discovered  unimpeachable 
evidence  that  many  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament have  undergone  revision  at  the  hands  of 
later  editors.  When  the  conditions  under  which 
the  book  was  originally  composed  were  changed, 
its  teachings  were  fitted  to  the  new  conditions  by 
[20] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

such  additions  or  modifications  as  the  editors 
deemed  necessary.  The  work  of  the  editors  was 
incorporated  in  the  body  of  the  work,  or,  in  the 
case  of  minor  changes,  simply  placed  in  the  margin. 
But  in  the  process  of  copying,  these  also  were 
written  in  as  integral  parts  of  the  book.  The 
modern  custom  of  throwing  such  matter  into  the 
form  of  foot-notes  or  of  bracketing  it  with  the 
editor's  name  or  initials  appended,  was  unknown  to 
the  ancients.  Examples  of  such  editorial  revision 
are  found  in  the  books  of  Kings  (revised  in  the  light 
of  the  teachings  of  Deuteronomy) ;  the  discourses 
of  the  prophets  (revised  to  bring  them  into  har- 
mony with  the  conditions,  or  to  make  them  appli- 
cable to  the  needs,  of  a  later  age) ;  and  the  psalms, 
many  of  which  bear  the  marks  of  such  editing. 

This  editorial  work  is  looked  upon  with  equa- 
nimity, for  it  furnishes  proof  of  continuous  liter- 
ary activity  among  the  Hebrews  through  many 
generations,  and  helps  us  to  trace  the  movements 
of  religious  thought  along  its  main  channel  as 
well  as  its  tributary  streams.  One  who  has  his 
eye  trained  for  this  kind  of  work  finds  little  diffi- 
culty in  separating  these  later  additions  from  the 
original  text.  Scholars  may  differ  in  their  judg- 
ment as  to  individual  instances,  but  all  agree  in 
their  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the  editors  have 
been  at  work  on  the  text. 
[21] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

5.  Questions  of  authorship  have  engaged  a 
large  share  of  attention  among  men  of  the  new 
school.  It  is  well  known  that  the  Hebrews  wrere 
indifferent  to  the  fame  of  authorship.  Their  in- 
terest was  primarily  in  the  truth,  and  not  in  their 
own  literary  reputation.  They  often  wrote  anony- 
mously. The  same  reluctance,  which  led  some 
writers  to  suppress  their  names,  influenced  others 
to  ascribe  their  writings  to  men  of  ancient  renown. 
For  example:  Moses  is  represented  as  delivering 
farewell  speeches  to  Israel  a  short  time  before  his 
death,  just  as  Thucydides  puts  speeches  into  the 
mouth  of  Pericles.  The  book  of  Daniel,  also,  is 
pseudonymous.  Other  instances  might  be  given, 
but  these  will  suffice.  Some  of  the  prophetical 
books  were  undoubtedly  written  by  the  men  whose 
names  they  bear,  but  the  writers  of  most  of  the 
Old  Testament  books  have  concealed  their  iden- 
tity beyond  possibility  of  detection.  And  when 
the  books  are  broken  up  into  their  constituent 
parts,  and  each  is  treated  separately,  the  question 
becomes  much  more  complicated;  but  while  the 
number  of  authors  is  necessarily  greatly  multiplied, 
their  identification  becomes  a  negligible  factor. 

Tradition  has  assigned  names  to  some  of  the 

books  and  parts  of  books.    For  example,  Moses* 

name  is  connected  with  the  Pentateuch,  David's 

with  the  Psalter,   Solomon's  with   the   book  of 

[22] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

Proverbs,  Isaiah's  with  the  long  book  which  goes 
by  his  name,  and  so  on  through  the  list. 

It  is  held  by  the  new  school  that  tradition  is 
without  authority  unless  it  harmonizes  with  con- 
clusions based  upon  actual  study  of  the  facts.  It 
is  claimed  that  the  facts  prove  the  composite 
character  of  the  Pentateuch,  its  component  parts 
being  separated  from  each  other  by  centuries  of 
time,  its  present  form  dating  from  the  period 
subsequent  to  the  exile.  It  is  held  that  Isaiah  is 
the  author  of  certain  chapters  in  the  first  part  of 
the  book,  but  that  an  unknown  writer  of  the  exilic 
period,  living  a  century  and  a  half  after  Isaiah, 
poured  the  glowing  message  of  comfort  for  exiled 
Israel,  found  in  chapters  forty  to  fifty-five,  out  of 
a  heart  that  had  shared  the  griefs,  and  was  there- 
fore fitted  to  raise  the  hopes,  of  his  despairing 
countrymen.  It  is  believed  that  similar  con- 
vincing evidence  compels  us  to  separate  other 
books  into  their  constituent  parts  and  to  assign 
these  with  approximate  certainty,  not,  as  already 
said,  to  their  individual  authors,  but  to  their  re- 
spective periods  of  composition. 

As  regards  other  Old  Testament  books,  it  is 
held  that  Jonah  is  best  interpreted  as  an  allegory, 
and  Daniel  as  an  apocalypse  dating  from  the 
Maccabean  period.  The  Song  of  Songs  is  re- 
garded either  as  a  collection  of  independent  love 
[23] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

lyrics,  or  as  a  semi-dramatic  poem,  the  purpose  of 
which  is  to  celebrate  the  triumph  of  a  pure  woman's 
love  under  great  temptation. 

You  may  now  be  ready  to  ask,  what  value  the 
inhabitants  of  this  new  country  place  upon  the 
Bible  ?  They  would  answer  this  question  by  call- 
ing attention  to  the  evident  purpose  for  which  the 
Bible  was  given.  What  is  that  purpose  ?  Certainly 
the  Bible  was  not  intended  to  be  a  cyclopaedia  of 
general  information,  nor  an  authoritative  text 
book  of  natural  science,  nor  a  manual  of  historical 
information,  nor  yet  a  book  of  philosophy.  In- 
deed, we  could  keep  on  indefinitely  telling  what 
the  Bible  was  not  intended  to  be.  But  how  can 
we  be  sure  of  the  correctness  of  these  negative 
assertions  ?  Our  appeal  is  to  the  facts.  A  can- 
did examination  of  the  Bible  results,  it  is  af- 
firmed, in  the  conviction  that  none  of  these 
things  constitute  its  ultimate  purpose.  I  will  not 
attempt  to  give  all  the  reasons  which  support 
this  conviction,  but  I  will  instance  one  or  two. 

Its  purpose  cannot  have  been  to  unroll  the 
panorama  of  history;  for  the  way  in  which  the 
Bible  deals  with  historical  events  shows  an  utter 
indifference  to  order  and  proportion,  such  as  the 
historian  would  naturally  observe.  There  are 
unaccountable  breaks  in  the  narrative,  wide  gaps 
left  for  conjecture  to  fill  up,  redundancies,  loiter- 
[24] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

ings  by  the  way,  expansion  of  personal  details, 
which  in  a  history  proper  would  take  a  secondary 
place,  if  inserted  at  all.  The  interest  of  the 
biblical  writers  centered  in  just  those  things  which 
charm  us  most,  viz.,  personalia,  individual  traits 
of  character,  every-day  happenings.  These  writers 
had  access  to  documents  from  which  they  could 
have  constructed  a  more  extensive  and  orderly  nar- 
rative of  events.  The  fact  that  they  did  not  choose 
so  to  use  these  documents,  even  while  making 
selections  from  them,  proves  that  they  had  an- 
other purpose  in  mind. 

Again,  the  purpose  of  the  Bible  is  not  to  teach 
science.  This  almost  seems  too  obvious  to  call 
for  proof.  One  thing  is  certain,  the  inhabitants 
of  the  new  country  spend  no  time  in  seeking  to 
harmonize  the  statements  of  the  Bible  with  the 
conclusions  of  modern  science,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  such  harmony  is  impossible  and  un- 
necessary. They  think  one  might  as  well  try  to 
harmonize  the  Ptolemaic  with  the  Copernican 
system  of  astronomy.  The  so-called  science  of 
the  Bible  is  not  science  in  the  strict  sense.  It 
cannot  be  judged  by  the  standards  of  the  present 
day.  The  new-country  scholars  find  it  more 
profitable  to  study  these  primitive  statements  in 
the  light  of  their  own  time  than  to  indulge  in  what 
they  regard  as  artificial  and  useless  modes  of  har- 
[25] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

monization.  If  the  purpose  of  the  Bible  was  some- 
thing other  than  a  scientific  purpose,  then  why, 
say  they,  should  we  hold  the  Bible  to  strict  account 
for  its  statements  regarding  matters  that  fall 
within  the  domain  of  science  ? 

Keeping  to  the  facts,  and  by  their  light  inquir- 
ing what  is  the  Bible's  supreme  purpose,  they 
find  it  to  be  this,  and  this  only:  the  revealing  of 
God's  character  and  will  to  men,  and  the  recovery 
of  sinful  men  to  God.  The  Bible,  it  is  believed, 
must  be  judged  in  the  light  of  this  purpose  alone. 
Therefore,  the  men  of  the  new  country  hold  fast, 
in  a  large  and  luminous  way,  to  the  doctrine  of 
inspiration.  They  judge  the  Bible  by  its  fruits. 
They  believe  it  to  be  the  product  of  a  unique 
inspiration,  and  therefore  •  the  supreme  book  of 
the  world,  because  light  from  God  shines  from  it 
most  clearly,  and  in  it  man  can  read  his  duty 
most  accurately. 

The  Bible  serves  its  purpose  unerringly.  It 
reveals  the  character  and  will  of  God,  and  it  is 
the  instrument  of  grace  in  recovering  sinful  men 
to  God.  This  has  been  its  history  in  the  past 
ages,  and  this  shall  be  its  glory  through  all  coming 
time.  The  Bible  has  not  failed,  it  does  not  fail, 
and  it  never  can  fail,  in  the  accomplishment  of 
this  one  sovereign  and  gracious  purpose.  In  this 
respect  the  Bible  stands  forever  impregnable. 

[26] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

To  speak  of  any  other  kind  of  inerrancy  is  quite 
aside  from  the  Bible's  real  purpose. 

People  who  live  in  the  new  country  are  not  sur- 
prised, therefore,  when  they  are  told  that  historical 
statements  of  the  Bible  are  not  always  free  from 
error,  and  that  the  science  of  the  Bible  cannot  be 
brought  into  accord  with  the  science  of  our  time. 
It  is  true  that  in  the  days  of  our  fathers  the  doc- 
trine of  inspiration  was  so  defined  as  to  involve 
the  absolute  inerrancy  of  every  part  of  Scripture. 
Such  of  their  children,  however,  as  live  in  the  new 
country,  hold  that  the  Bible  nowhere  claims  for 
itself  such  infallibility,  but  is  itself  a  witness  to 
the  contrary.  The  infallibility  lies  in  its  power  to 
accomplish  its  spiritual  purpose.  In  fulfilling  this 
purpose  the  Bible  presses  to  the  forefront  of  the 
world's  literature  and  stands  there  forever  in 
splendid  isolation.  It  is  infallible,  not  because  it 
tells  the  story  of  the  flood,  or  the  story  of  David 
and  Goliath  with  literal  accuracy,  but  because  it 
tells  the  story  of  God's  self-revelation  to  man  with 
satisfying  fullness. 

The  supreme  position  which  the  Bible  holds 
to-day  is  due  to  the  perfect  revelation  of  divine 
wisdom  and  grace  which  it  gives  in  its  portraiture 
of  Jesus  Christ.  In  the  transcendent  personality 
of  Christ  is  the  real  and  final  inerrancy.  Infalli- 
bility is  essentially  the  characteristic,  not  of  a  book, 
[27] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

but  of  a  person,  a  spiritual  person,  a  divine-human 
person.  The  doctrine  of  infallibility  comes  to 
rest  in  Jesus.  What  though  the  Bible  be  defec- 
tive in  some  of  its  historical  statements,  imperfect 
in  its  explanation  of  natural  phenomena  ?  It  shows 
us  unerringly  Him  who  is  the  life  and  truth  and 
grace  of  God  incarnate,  and  we  come  to  faim  that 
we  may  have  life,  that  we  may  know  the  truth, 
that  we  may  be  saved  by  grace. 

Jesus'  own  attitude  to  the  Old  Testament,  it  is 
claimed,  confirms  this  view.  For  He  repealed 
outright  certain  long-standing  doctrines,  some  of 
them  having  Old  Testament  sanction.  "It  was 
said  to  them  of  old  time  —  but  I  say  unto  you." 
If  we  believe  in  the  infallibility  of  Jesus,  we  cannot 
believe  even  in  the  moral  infallibility  of  every 
particular  passage  of  Scripture. 

The  foregoing  recital  does  not  include  all  the 
beliefs  that  are  current  among  the  inhabitants  of 
the  new  Bible-country.  It  was  not  my  intention 
to  describe  these  exhaustively.  I  fear  that  what 
I  have  presented  to  you  will  occasion  misunder- 
standing, and  possibly  create  alarm;  and  some 
of  you,  perhaps,  may  think  that  it  is  a  very  unsafe 
country  to  live  in.  You  may  suspect  that  the 
government  is  unstable,  that  the  people  are  lawless 
and  indifferent  to  sacred  things.  You  may  at 
least  think  that  the  climate  must  be  variable  and 
[28] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

changes  of  weather  frequent.  You  may  possibly 
entertain  a  suspicion  that  there  are  no  safeguards 
against  intellectual  vagaries,  that  every  man  can 
think  as  he  pleases,  and  that  opinions  change 
incessantly. 

It  is  true  that  in  the  new  country  a  greater  de- 
gree of  freedom  prevails  than  in  the  old  country, 
but  it  is  a  freedom  sanctioned  and  regulated  by 
law.  The  government  of  the  old  country  may  be 
likened  to  an  absolute  monarchy,  while  that  of  the 
new  country  is  framed  after  the  model  of  a  republic. 
The  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is  dominated  in  the 
old  country  by  a  more  rigid  theory  of  inspiration 
than  that  which  prevails  in  the  new  country.  A 
larger  measure  of  liberty,  therefore,  is  accorded  to 
criticism  and  private  judgment  in  the  new  country 
than  would  be  thought  advisable  in  the  old 
country. 

It  is  a  common  objection  that  the  new-country 
folk  are  greatly  given  to  controversies  among 
themselves,  and  are  often  at  a  disagreement  in 
important  matters.  The  same  might  be  said  of 
the  American  Republic.  But  all  who  live  under  the 
Stars  and  Stripes  are  content  with  their  surround- 
ings, despite  the  conflict  of  parties.  The  old  coun- 
try has  perplexing  problems  of  its  own  to  deal  with, 
and  many  real  difficulties  to  face.  To  some  minds 
these  problems  become  insoluble,  and  the  diffi- 
[29] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

culties  unbearable,  and  the  only  way  of  escape  is 
through  emigration. 

Without  stopping  to  argue  whether  the  old  Bible- 
country  or  the  new  is  the  better  country  to  live  in, 
it  only  remains  to  be  said  that  the  new  country  is 
rapidly  filling  up  with  emigrants  from  the  old. 
Speaking  geographically,  England,  Scotland,  Ger- 
many, Canada,  and  the  United  States  have  sent 
large  and  influential  companies  of  settlers,  who 
have  made  their  home  in  the  new  country.  Within 
recent  years  the  flow  of  emigration  has  been  de- 
cidedly on  the  increase. 

The  new  country  is  "a  far-stretching  land," 
and  offers  unlimited  possibilities  of  growth.  In 
extent  it  is  larger  than  the  old  country,  but  much 
of  it  is  still  unexplored  and  promises  rich  results 
to  the  enthusiastic  and  diligent  laborer.  It  is  a 
land  where  hard  and  honest  toil  will  reap  great 
rewards.  The  facilities  for  extensive  and  success- 
ful study  are  abundant.  Libraries  abound. 
Books  and  periodicals  circulate  freely.  The 
people  point  with  pride  to  their  eminent  scholars 
and  to  the  vast  array  of  great  books  which  are  the 
product  of  their  untiring  industry.  Though  it  is 
a  land  of  magnificent  distances,  travelling  is  be- 
coming easier,  and  distant  points  are  becoming 
more  accessible. 

There  was  once  bitter  strife  between  the  holders 
[30] 


The  New  Bible-Country 

of  the  new  opinions  and  the  champions  of  the  old, 
as  there  was  strife  between  Abram's  herdmen  and 
those  of  Lot.  Now,  as  then,  it  has  been  discovered 
that  the  way  of  separation  is  the  way  of  peace. 
By  this  I  do  not  mean  that  the  men  of  the  new 
country  have  broken  off  social  relations  with 
their  fellows,  or  left  the  church  of  their  fathers, 
or  forsaken  the  land  of  their  birth.  I  mean 
simply  that  they  have  found  room  to  dwell  in,  in 
the  wide  realm  of  thought,  without  engaging  in 
personal  disputes  with  their  neighbors  who  do  not 
agree  with  them.  The  boundaries  of  both  coun- 
tries are  so  well  defined  that  every  man  who  thinks 
may  soon  discover  to  which  he  naturally  belongs. 
The  process  of  naturalization  in  the  new  country 
is  sufficiently  difficult  to  make  exclusion  laws 
unnecessary.  So  far  as  my  knowledge  goes,  there 
are  few,  if  any,  "  undesirable  citizens." 

Intercommunication  between  the  two  countries 
is  to  be  encouraged.  Mutual  acquaintance  is  de- 
sirable. The  inhabitants  of  the  old  country, 
especially,  ought  to  know  the  character  and  ways, 
the  prevailing  ideals  and  beliefs  of  the  people 
who  dwell  in  the  new  country.  There  can  be  no 
compulsory  emigration,  but  the  tourist  should 
be  in  evidence  on  both  sides  of  the  dividing  sea. 

If  the  old  country,  with  its  staid,  old-fashioned 
and  venerable  customs,  satisfies  you ;  if  you  dare 
[31] 


The  'New  Bible-Country 

not  risk  the  excitement  and  hardship  incident  to 
life  in  a  new  country,  the  only  thing  to  do  is  to 
remain  where  you  are,  happy  in  the  grace  of  God 
that  shines  from  the  open  sky  above  you.  But  if 
you  are  dissatisfied  with  your  present  intellectual 
home ;  if  you  feel  restricted ;  if  difficulties  attend 
your  study  of  the  Bible,  which  the  traditional  ex- 
planation fails  to  clear  up ;  if  you  would  know  the 
Bible  as  newly  interpreted,  you  will  find  in  the  new 
country  not  less  law  but  more  freedom;  and  out 
of  the  same  open  sky,  that  now  beams  upon  you, 
grace  will  flow  from  the  same  God  whose  chil- 
dren dwell  both  in  the  old  land  and  in  the  new. 


[32] 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


